Tag: Transvaluation of all values
All ye are brethren
Are all men really brethren?—Negro and Indian, Blackfellow, Kalmuck, and Coolie—the well-born, and the base-bred, beer-soaked loafer, and hero-hearted patriot, belted chieftain and ignoble mechanic-slave—pot of iron and pot of clay?
What proof is there that the brotherhood-of-man hypothesis is in accordance with nature? On what trustworthy biologic, historic or other evidence does it rest? If it is natural, then rivalry, competition, and strife are unnatural. And it is proposed to prove in this book that strife, competition, rivalry, and the wholesale destruction of feeble types of men, is not only natural, but highly necessary. [Emphasis by Editor!]
Has ‘brotherhood’ ever been tried upon earth? Where, when and with what final result? Is not self-assertion nobler, grander and more truly heroic than self-denial? Is not self-abasement but another term for voluntary vassalage; voluntary burden-bearing?
Christ might well and truthfully have said unto his followers ‘Come unto me all ye that are weary and heavy laden and I will bind you in unbreakable bonds, and load you down like an ass between two burdens.’
The ‘poor and ignorant’ were his first followers—the vagrants, the disinherited shiftless classes: and to this very day, the poorer and more ignorant men and women are, the more eager are they to follow his religious ideals, or the political millennialisms that are distilled out of his delusions.
‘If we only lived as Christ lived, what a beautiful world this would be,’ saith all thoughtless ones. If we lived as Christ lived, there would be none of us left to live. He begat no children; he laboured not for his bread; he possessed neither house nor home.[1] He merely talked.
Primitive Christianity cunningly appealed to the imagination of a world of superstitious slaves (eager for some mode of escape that meant not the giving and receiving of battle-strokes.) It organized them for the overthrow of Heroic Principles; and substituted, for a genuine nobility based on battle-selection, a crafty theocracy founded upon priest-craft, hell-craft, alms-giving, politicalisms, and all that is impure and subterranean. It is a doctrine at once disgraceful in its antecedents, its teachers, and in itself. Truly has it been called ‘the fatal dower of Constantine,’ for it has suffocated, or is suffocating the seeds of Heroism.
Both ancient and modern Christianism and all that has its root therein, is the negation of everything grand, noble, generous, heroic, and the glorification of everything feeble, atrocious, dishonourable, dastardly
[e.g., the trans people that neochristians presently adore! —Editor]
. The cross is now, and ever has been, an escutcheon of shame. It represents a gallows, and a Semite slave swinging thereon. For two thousand years it has absolutely overturned human reason, overthrown common sense, infected the world with madness, submissiveness, degeneracy.
Truly, there is a way which seemeth right unto a people, but the ends thereof are the ways of death.
Sound the loud timbrel, O’er lands and o’er waves; The Israelite triumphs! The nations are—graves!
_____________
[1] These terms are used in the strict Darwinian sense.
Sieg Heil!
by Gaedhal
Remember what the opposite of this is, white man. It was “academic literature” such as this that was burnt by the Hitlerjugund. Karl Andersson studies in England. England would be free of such pests had they not defeated themselves at World War 2.
Both the American Civil War and World War 2—both of which were the biggest, deadliest, most technologically sophisticated wars of their day—were really just the White man going to war to defeat himself. Only the negro won the American Civil War, and, as Alex Linder puts it: only the Jew won World War 2.
However, Christian axiology has convinced us that we win when we lose. The New Testament is full of enigmas like the last being first, the meek conquering the earth through their meekness; whores and tax-collectors (i.e. traitors and collaborators) being more heavenward than scribes and Pharisees; I am weak when I am strong.
That one wins when he loses is very much in this vein.
This is why I love: ‘Sieg Heil’. Christ tells us that we win when we lose. Hitler tells us that we win when we win. There are no oriental paradoxes, or enigmas or headscratchers from Herr Hitler. Nope: Hitler gives us the “straight dope” as a negro might phrase it in his ebonics.
As far as sociology is concerned, we must either abandon our reason, or abandon Christ.
He is pre-eminently, the prophet of unreason — the preacher of rabble-rabies. All that is enervating and destructive of manhood, he glorifies, — all that is self-reliant and heroic, he denounces. Lazarus, the filthy and diseased vagrant, is his hero of heroes; and Dives, the sane, energetic citizen, is his ‘awful’ example of baseness and criminality. He praises “the humble” and he curses the proud. He blesses the failures, and damns the successful. All that is noble, he perverts — all that is atrocious he upholds. He inverts all the natural instincts of mankind, and urges us to live artificial lives. He commands the demonetization of virtues that aggrandize a people, and advises his admirers to submit in quietness to every insult, contumely, indignity; to be slaves, de-facto. Indeed, there is scarce one thought in the whole of his Dicta that is practically true.
O, Christ! O, Christ! Thou artful fiend! Thou Great Subverter! What an amazing Eblis-glamour, thou hast cast over the world? Thou mean insignificant-minded Jew!
Why is it that our modern philosophers are so mortally afraid to boldly challenge the ‘inspired’ utopianism of this poor self-deluded Galilean mountaineer, — this preacher of all eunuch-virtues — of self-abasement, of passive suffering?
The sickly humanitarian ethics, so eloquently rayed forth by Jesus Christ and his superstitious successors, in ancient Judea, and throughout the moribund Roman empire, are generally accepted in Anglo-Saxondom as the very elixir of immortal wisdom, the purest, wisest, grandest, most incontrovertible of all ‘divine revelations,’ or occult thaumaturgies. And yet when closely examined, they are found to be neither divine, occult, reasonable, nor even honest; but composed, almost exclusively of the stuff that nightmares are made of; together with a strong dash of oriental legerdemain.
Through a thousand different channels, current politico-economic belief is dominated by the base communistic cabala of the ‘man of many sorrows;’ yet as a practical theorem, it is hardly ever critically examined. Why is it that the suggested social solutions promulgated by Jesus, Peter, Paul, James, and other Asiatic cataleptics, are accepted so meekly by us, upon trust? If these men were anything, they were crude socialist reformers with misshapen souls, preachers of ‘a new heaven, and a new earth,’ that is to say, demagogues — politicians-of-the-slums; and out of the slums, nothing that is noble can ever be born.
As agitators, Jesus and his modern continuators shall be exclusively considered in these pages. However, it must be distinctly understood that the spiritual and temporal in all cosmogonies, are so intricately interwoven, that it is almost impossible to completely divorce them. Like the Siamese twins, Gods and Governments are inextricably bound together; so much so indeed, that if you kill one, the other cannot live. Hence the open or secret alliance, that has always existed between the politician and the priest.
Whatever their primitive purity (or impurity), all operative creedal philosophies are essentially civil and military codes, police regulations. ‘Religion is a power, a political engine, and if there was no God, I would have to invent one,’ said the great Napoleon. In letter and in spirit, Christianity is above all things a political theory, and a theory that often takes the form of raging hysterics.
Religions are the matrix in which public institutions are generally moulded. This has ever been well understood by the dominant leaders of mankind, from Numa to Brigham Young, from Solon to Loyola, from Constantine to the lowest Levite hireling, who gets paid in dimes and cents for his unctuous mock — dithyrambs.
Slave

I’m not finished with James Burke, and I’d like to add to what I said about him in the comments section on Tuesday.
I have just watched episode 20 of the second season of Connections. I draw the viewer’s attention to what Burke says about the German concept of Lebensraum from this point until the end of the episode.
What impresses me about Burke, as what impresses me about two other Britons of whom in previous years I have spoken much on this site—Kenneth Clark and Tom Holland—is that, while I admire their intelligence and penetration in their observations—artistic and western history (Clark), religious, axiological and historical (Holland) and scientific, technological and historical (Burke)—, all three are prisoners of Christian morality.
If it were possible (obviously no BBC or similar TV service would fund my project) I would make a series of thirteen programmes explaining what Holland says: how the morality of the contemporary atheist, even the radical one, is still dominated by Christian ethics. But I would film that series from an opposite scale of values to that of the neochristian Holland.
In the segment linked above, for example, Burke reproves the doctrine of Lebensraum, which some Germans planned to implement in Africa or Latin America. Because of that scale of values that seems so natural to Burke and virtually all contemporary Britons, I live in a horrid world, and in a Latin American city at that.
What good is brilliance in explaining technological inventions that have revolutionised mankind if Burke remains a slave to Christian morality? Obviously, he has never asked himself this question because there are no transvalued men on his island.
Or are there?
Prolefeed
I want to add to what I said on Sunday: that a priest of holy words doesn’t spend time thinking about the recent attack on Trump. The reasons are clear and could be summed up by what Orwell called prolefeed (the mental food with which the System alienates commoners). To overthink the recent attack is to be part of the System, regardless of whether it was a conspiracy or a lone gunman’s attack.
Incidentally, before violating Occam’s principle we should always consider the more parsimonious lone-wolf hypothesis. The fact that, decades later, most Americans doubt that a single gunman killed JFK shows the sheer power that sensationalist films such as the one shot by the Jew Oliver Stone exert over the American collective unconscious.
Those who consume Hollywood prolefeed and call themselves dissidents should face the fact that if the majority of the proles believe something because of prolefeed, that is what the System wants them to believe. (No one reads the Warren Report, but everyone watches the prolefeed that Hollywood has been offering us for decades.) And the same goes for the books about the JFK assassination. For every thousand books that promote conspiracy theories, there is only one that proves that Oswald acted alone. Many years ago I bought one of the latter because, following what John Stuart Mill says in On Liberty, the opinion of the isolated investigator should be taken into consideration because there is a chance that he could be right (and the rest of society wrong).
Remember 1984. The totalitarian state printed pornography for the proles, making them believe it was literature banned by the government. But it was controlled opposition even though the proles believed they were reading forbidden literature. Porn was part of the Machiavellian system of social control.
Quite independently of swallowing the conspiracy prolefeed that the System allows on the internet, the priest of the sacred words sees things from his meta-perspective. And from this perspective, what would be the real dissident thought?
Something we said on Thursday in instalment #42 of the Hitler series. Instead of saying, as liberals (part of the Establishment) do, that they wish the bullet had hit Trump, the real dissenter would like that a British soldier’s bullet had hit George Washington, who empowered the Jews, and that the US would never have gained independence from the British crown. The priest would say that it is time to forget not only Washington but all the so-called founding fathers and replace, within himself, all those founding cucks with the founders of the Third Reich.
That is good dissent!, not the conspiracy theories—prolefeed for the proles—that are now beginning to brew in the wake of Saturday’s events. But it is obvious that white nationalists, neo-normies after all, don’t think in these terms. They haven’t realised that as the Aryan race comes first, if there is a conflict of interest between race and the religion of our parents or the political system of the country we were born into, we must sacrifice the latter.
In my case, for example, I despise Hernán Cortés and the 16th-century Spaniards because they sinned against the holy spirit: they soiled their blood, a sin that cannot be forgiven. And I can say the same about the religion of my parents—Catholicism—because in the 1530s a pope sanctioned marriage between Spaniards and Amerindian women. But this endless contempt for the country of my birth, which includes contempt for the Criollos who continue to blend to the extent that I don’t have a single male friend in the country where I live, is absent in racialists north of the Rio Grande. Except for retired Canadian blogger Sebastian E. Ronin, they don’t look down the founding ideologies of the US and Canada.
Racking one’s brains over conspiracies, or blaming the Jews for all the ills of the West, doesn’t advance the Aryan cause. It is seeing the mote in another’s eye and not the beam in one’s own. What the priest must do is to repudiate his nation’s project with all his might, with all his mind, with all his spirit and all his heart; and begin to create a new religion based on the ideals of Uncle Adolf.
1969
A few years back I wrote this brief account of my first encounter with Ragnar Redbeard’s Might Is Right in 1969:
I was raised in a Christian household, and nominally I identified myself as Christian until I was 17. But, in truth, I did not really understand Christian doctrine and even less did I subscribe to its values.
When I was 17, I was a member of the National Renaissance Party, based in New York City. I lived with my family about an hour away by bus.
One Sunday evening, following an NRP meeting, I was speaking with party leader James Madole. I told him that I was trying to plow my way through Nietzsche’s Thus Spoke Zarathustra, but that I was having a hard time of it, and there was much in it that I did not understand.
He told me that Nietzsche was indeed difficult, and that perhaps I should put Zarathustra aside until I was a little older. Instead, he gave me a condensed edition of Ragnar Redbeard’s Might Is Right, entitled The Whiteman’s Guidebook. He told me that I might find it more useful at that point in my intellectual development.
I read it on my bus ride home that night. When I stepped on the bus I was still a nominal Christian. By the time I got off the bus, I was a heathen and anti-Christian.
I still have that booklet on my shelf.
______ 卐 ______
You may use my email to you in any way that you see fit.
I mentioned that I still had the original booklet that James Madole gave me—see attached (the cover was orignally white but has been discolored a little with age).
I don’t know who produced it. It has a notation on the back reading “Aryan Publishing Co.” and giving a Milwaukee post office box. Madole just had this one copy. I have never heard of that publishing company in any other context and I have never seen the booklet advertised anywhere since then (1969). But somehow, this single copy it found its way to Madoles’ apartment / headquarters, and then into my hands at precisely the right moment.
Such are the workings of Destiny!
Heydrich, 7
Let’s be honest: Should they come to power, could you imagine American white nationalists casually talking about mass genocides, as these German hierarchs did after the buffet (in the film, from this point on)? And if they will be unable to do so, don’t you think such scruples have to do with worshipping the Jew on the cross, and regarding the Aryan Pilate who had him crucified as a wicked man?
American anti-Christians did realise this. Remember that passage in The Turner Diaries where racist revolutionaries let a Jewish community live and it caused so much trouble that those altruist revolutionaries had to be eliminated by transvalued revolutionaries?
When in the future the cold war against the Aryan man turns into a hot one, it will become clear that there is no way to save the race unless one repudiates Judeo-Christian morality. This is so true that, as we see in the film when they enjoy the buffet Heydrich offered them, it came out that the Vatican began to complain about such executions, and those present scoffed openly and uninhibitedly, laughing at Christian compassion.
Above, Cesare Orsenigo with Hitler and von Ribbentrop. In November 1943, nuncio Orsenigo spoke to the Führer on behalf of Pope Pius XII. In his conversation with Hitler, he talked about the status of persecuted peoples in the Third Reich, apparently referring to Jews. Over large parts of the conversation the Führer simply ignored the nuncio; he went to the window and didn’t listen.
Heydrich, 6
Today I watched the film from this moment until Otto Hoffman’s speech is interrupted by a phone call from Himmler to Heydrich. The segment made me think and even aroused my emotions.
For example, it came to my mind that Christians of the racial right evoke the figure of Friedrich Wilhelm Kritzinger, portrayed in the film by Franz Rudnick.
Kritzinger was a German civil servant and Secretary of State in the Reich Chancellery: one of the participants in the Wannsee Conference that established the policies of The Final Solution. After the conference, he attempted to resign from his post in the Chancellery, but his resignation was rejected because ‘it would be worse without him’.
After the war, Kritzinger was arrested, along with most of the other surviving members of the Wannsee Conference, in 1946. During the Nuremberg Trials, he publicly declared himself ashamed of the Reich. He was released in April 1946 but then arrested again in December of the same year. He was later released and shortly afterwards died of natural causes.
With Germans like Kritzinger and Americans like the good Christians of today, we are getting nowhere. On the one hand, they recognise that the Jews want to exterminate the Aryans. On the other hand, they put the interests of the Jew before those of the Aryan when it comes to final solutions, because if it comes to a war to the death between the two races, by feeling compassion for the enemy one is tacitly betraying one’s ethnicity.
I don’t think Christian racialists will see the obvious unless they repudiate the religion of their parents. We saw what happened in Germany after the war. The Anglo-Americans easily denazified the German nation by simply using Judeo-Christian ethics as the default morality, and the ideals of National Socialism were quickly forgotten by these Germans who became, like the rest of Westerners, vile bourgeoisie from the 1950s to the present day.
I think it is even treason to go around saying that the film is making things up and that the SS weren’t exterminationists. That’s why I like David Irving and Mark Weber, because despite being sympathisers of Hitler and the Third Reich they don’t fall into this neochristian temptation of wanting to ‘baptise’, with Christian morality, these SS hierarchs who appear at the round table.
If things continue to go wrong and the Aryans are going to be exterminated, I think only the last generation of whites will discover that from WW2 onwards all Westerners, racialists included, made an astronomical mistake.
Conversely, if the racialists were consistent with their premise of racial protection, they would have to have as martyrs all those at the table who were killed by the Allies when the war ended, except Kritzinger because he never abandoned Judeo-Christian morality. Moreover, if English-speaking racialists were consistent, they would try to learn German to understand National Socialism thoroughly, and even to speak in a language that sounds tougher, more manly, than other European languages.
Otto Hoffman’s little speech, portrayed by Robert Atzorn, which starts here, shows the exact tone as the (still non-existent) priests of the sacred words should be speaking, even if we have zero political power. Remember what Savitri implied: the first step to conquer the world is to have this kind of thinking.
Might is right, 4
All ethics, politics and philosophies are pure assumptions, built upon assumptions. They rest on no sure basis. They are but shadowy castles-in-the-air erected by day-dreamers, or by rogues, upon nursery fables. It is time they were firmly planted upon an enduring foundation. This can never be accomplished until the racial mind has first been thoroughly cleansed and drastically disinfected of its depraved, alien, and demoralizing concepts of right and wrong. In no human brain can sufficient space be found, for the relentless logic of hard fact, until all pre-existent delusions have been finally annihilated.
Half measures are of no avail, we must go down to the very roots and tear them out, even to the last fibre. We must be, like nature, hard, cruel, relentless.
Too long the dead hand has been permitted to sterilize living thought—too long, right and wrong, good and evil, have been inverted by false prophets. In the days that are at hand, neither creed nor code must be accepted upon authority, human, superhuman or ‘divine’ (morality and conventionalism are for subordinates). Religions and constitutions and all arbitrary principles, every mortal theorem, must be deliberately put to the question. No moral dogma must be taken for granted—no standard of measurement deified. There is nothing inherently sacred about moral codes. Like the wooden idols of long ago, they are all the work of human hands, and what man has made, man can destroy.
He that is slow to believe anything and everything is of great understanding, for belief in one false principle, is the beginning of all unwisdom. The chief duty of every new age is to up-raise new men to determine its liberties, to lead it towards material success—to rend (as it were) the rusty padlocks and chains of dead custom that always prevent healthy expansion. Theories and ideals and constitutions, that may have meant life and hope, and freedom, for our ancestors, may now mean destruction, slavery and dishonour to us. As environments change no human ideal standeth sure.
Wherever, therefore, a lie has built unto itself a throne, let it be assailed without pity and without regret, for under the domination of a falsehood, no nation can permanently prosper. Let established sophisms be dethroned, rooted out, burnt and destroyed, for they are a standing menace to all true nobility of thought and action. Whatever alleged ‘truth’ is proven by results, to be but an empty fiction, let it be unceremoniously flung into the outer darkness, among the dead gods, dead empires, dead philosophies, and other useless lumber and wreckage.
The most dangerous of all enthroned lies is the holy, the sanctified, the privileged lie—the lie that ‘everybody’ believes to be a model truth. It is the fruitful mother of all other popular errors and delusions. It is hydra-headed. It has a thousand roots. It is a social cancer. The lie that is known to be a lie is half eradicated, but the lie that even intelligent persons regard as a sacred fact—the lie that has been inculcated around a mother’s knee—is more dangerous to contend against than a creeping pestilence. Popular lies have ever been the most potent enemies of personal liberty. There is only one way to deal with them. Cut them out, to the very core, just as cancers are. Exterminate them root and branch, or they will surely eat us all up. We must annihilate them, or they will us. Half and half remedies are of no avail.
However, when a lie has gone too far—when it has taken up its abode in the very tissues, bones and brains of a people, then all remedies are useless. Even the lancet is of no avail. Repentance of past misdeeds cannot ‘save’ decadents from extermination. The fatal bolt is shot; and into the fiery furnace of wholesale slavery, and oblivion, they must go, to be there righteously consumed. From their ashes something new, something nobler, may possibly evolve, but even that is the merest optimistic supposition.
______ 卐 ______
Editor’s interpolated note: My red emphasis! A strong possibility is that the white race is already doomed to extinction because of the sin of Christians—racialist Christians included—and those whom commenter Gaedhal has called hyper-Christian atheists. See image above. The ‘anti-Christian’ Jacobin revolutionaries used the symbol of the Mosaic tablets to present Christian injunctions (human rights, etc.) in a secular form.
Ragnar Redbeard continues:
______ 卐 ______
In nature the wages of sin is always death. Nature does not love the wrong-doer, but endeavours in every possible way to destroy him. Her curse is on the brow of the ‘meek and lowly.’ Her blessing is on the very hearts’ blood of the strong and the brave. Only Jews and Christs and other degenerates, think that rejuvenation can ever come through law and prayer. ‘All the tears of all the martyrs’ might just as well have never been shed.